#but I just wanted to say that maybe grrm was laying the groundwork for that in the first few chapters

[nightswatchdisbandmentera]

Bastards & Arms, Girls and Swords (& vice versa)

“The Lannisters are proud,” Jon observed. “You’d think the royal sigil would be sufficient, but no. He makes his mother’s House equal in honor to the king’s.”

“The woman is important too!” Arya protested.

Jon chuckled. “Perhaps you should do the same thing, little sister. Wed Tully to Stark in your arms.”

“A wolf with a fish in its mouth?” It made her laugh. “That would look silly. Besides, if a girl can’t fight, why should she have a coat of arms?”

Jon shrugged. “Girls get the arms but not the swords. Bastards get the swords but not the arms. I did not make the rules, little sister.”

- Arya I, AGOT

This is a very iconic passage as far as contextualizing the ways in which Jon and Arya are outsiders in the established feudal society, all the while being insiders in some way. Jon’s quote (which establishes how the rules be) is the most recognizable part of this conversation due to what comes later (the gifting of Needle) but Arya’s preceding question is what jumped out to me as I was doing a reread of this chapter. This is mostly because it seems to get to the matter of feudal legitimacy.

Because Arya’s question had me thinking: beyond having marital ability, does possession of a sword establish legitimacy in the feudal system? Obviously the possession of arms does equate to legitimacy since one would get them by being born to a recognized legal union. But what does it mean to have one over the other? And what does it mean to have both? Can a person only be half legitimate? And where would that even matter?

As I was thinking about this, I immediately thought of Daemon Blackfyre, who was one of Aegon IV’s legitimized bastards. If memory serves me right, part of Daemon’s claim to kingship was that he held Aegon the Conqueror’s sword, Blackfyre (hence his dynastic name). His nickname was even “The King Who Bore the Sword” and many were inclined to follow him since his possession of the legendary sword seemed to signify kingship; and by passing the sword down to him, Aegon IV officially acknowledged him as his son. But the sword alone wasn’t legitimizing. That happened later when his father legitimized him and his other half siblings on his deathbed. After that, Daemon had both the sword and the arms and he could push his claim for the throne. So if we go back to Jon and Arya’s conversation, Daemon the bastard managed to get the two keys of legitimization (insofar as kingship goes): the sword and the arms.

Now, let’s go back to Jon and Arya. At this point in the story, Arya has the arms which were passed down to her by her father. She doesn’t have the sword here but a few chapters later (in Jon II) she is gifted Needle - her very own sword which specifically made for her. Over time, this sword becomes an integral part of her development and her identity. It’s interesting that Arya gets the arms from her father and the sword from her brother - almost like legitimacy is being passed down patrilineally; even more interesting when you consider that GRRM originally intended for Jon to be her husband.

Jon, on the other hand, arguably has neither. As a bastard, he has no right to any arms. And though he has the martial ability, he does not have the sword; the family sword, Ice, was going to go to his half-brother who was the heir. Even if Jon managed to get a sword, it probably would be inconsequential; meaning that it would not be as legendary as Ice is. But things change as the story progresses. Several chapters later, he is given his very own sword (which he earned on his own merit) when he is gifted Longclaw by Lord Commander Mormont. Jon thinks that this act is like Mormont recognizing him as a son; he is giving Jon his son’s sword. Then two books later, Jon gets the arms when he is legitimized by Robb’s royal decree; though one has to wonder if GRRM initially intended for Arya to be the one to give him the arms as he gave her the sword. Still, legitimacy passed down patrilineally for Jon as it did for Arya. It’s even flipped: one gets the arms from a father and the sword from a brother, while the other gets the arms from a brother and a sword from a (surrogate) father. Both go through situations where they have to assume some sort of leadership (though Jon’s is far more extensive than Arya’s). However, these situations of leadership (big or small) come not because they were passed down as demanded by feudal succession, but because they were earned.

So now we have to wonder, what does this mean for Jon’s and Arya’s futures given that they hold both signs of legitimacy (as it might relate to kingship if we consider the Daemon Blackfyre example)? They both have the sword and the arms. In addition to that, Jon has a plethora of king foreshadowing and symbolism in the text, despite being a bastard. And he is quite skilled as a warrior. Arya may not have Jon’s martial ability, but she has learned some that is relevant to her strengths as a young girl (so she’s not totally hopeless). She also has some queen foreshadowing in the books; her wolf is even named after a warrior queen and she claims to assume a shortened version of Nymeria in ACOK.

Could they mirror Daemon Blackfyre, who was an outsider who came to be recognized as king? It’s hard to tell what will happen given that we still have two books left, but it’s just some food for thought. In any case, this chapter and Jon II (where Arya got the sword) could serve as seeding for what’s in store for Jon’s and Arya’s ultimate journeys.

[greenhikingboots]

Jon’s Pre-Canon Crush

Okay, Jonsa fam. I’ve seen a lot of great posts, especially in the last few months, about Jon’s reactions to Val. Among them, there’s one particular vein I like to assume everyone loves as much as I do. That is, when Jon thinks of Val’s hair as silver vs. when he thinks of it as the color of dark honey. You’ve seen those metas, right? They explain the likelihood of Jon’s future connection to Dany being negative — The air tastes cold. / My tongue is too numb to tell. All I taste is cold. — while his future connection to Sansa will be positive — It had been a long while since Jon Snow had seen a sight so lovely.

Well, in this post I want to expand on the angle of Val-is-sometimes-a-stand-in-for-Sansa. Only, I don’t want to speculate on what will happen between Jon and Sansa in the future, if we ever get GRRM’s last two books. Enough people have already done that, and they’ve done it so wonderfully that I have little to add. Instead, as the title of this post says, I want to focus on Jon’s pre-canon crush. More specifically: I want to focus on what Jon’s thoughts and feelings about Val say about his thoughts and feelings about Sansa.

But let me lay some groundwork first, okay? Until a few weeks ago, I went back and forth on pre-canon crush theories. I agreed they held a lot of potential and were a lot of fun to daydream about — a great premise for a one-shot, to be sure! Oh, and I’ve always loved it when people said things like, “Hey, Jon, your Targaryen is showing.” That’s classic stuff. But did I really think GRRM meant to hint at prior feelings rather than just laying a foundation for future feelings? Again, until a few weeks ago, I wasn’t totally convinced either way. But now I am fully committed to the Pre-Canon Crush Camp, assigned to cabin Jon-Had-Feelings-for-Sansa. [Did Sansa have feelings for Jon too? Ummm maybe? I think there’s some evidence to support that, but not as much. But, hey, that’s not the point of this post. Sorry. Moving on.] So what changed? Well, basically some ideas I’d previously had sunk in on a deeper level. It started with this post from @sherlokiness. It talks about GRRM commenting on a discrepancy in the books, two occasions where Jeyne Westerling’s physical descriptions do not match up. GRRM said the discrepancies were a mistake, a really unfortunate one because it distracts from the times when he intentionally included discrepancies of physical appearances. And basically us Jonsas loved it. Like, “Yep! Make sense! We assumed as much already, Mr. Martin.” And that’s because of the canon line mentioned earlier, right? You know the whole thing, don’t you? Oh, but you want me to quote it here anyway? Okay, fine, I’ll oblige.

They [Ghost and Val] look as though they belong together. Val was clad all in white [bleh, bleh, bleh] …but her eyes were blue, her long braid the color of dark honey, her cheeks flushed red from the cold. It had been a long while since Jon Snow had seen a sight so lovely.

Direwolf. Lots of white. Suspicious ellipses. Blue eyes. Long braid the color of dark honey. Right, okay, got it.  [BTW. Did you know there’s also a point, early on, where Val’s described as having high cheekbones? You know, a feature Sansa has as well!?!?] Anyway, when I saw sherlokiness’s post about GRRM’s comments and the Jonsas relating it to that canon scene with Ghost and Val, I reblogged it. Naturally. And in the tags I said something like, “I’ll have to double check but I’m pretty sure the willowy creature line comes after this line. As in, maybe Jon knew exactly who Val reminded him in that moment and he was trying to talk himself out of his pre-canon crush coming back to the surface.” I’m paraphrasing here. My tags were probably not as clear as that. Also, I was being a bit facetious. It was a thought I’d had before, but just a passing one. Again (AGAIN! Do I say that too much?), I’d been going back and forth about pre-canon crush theories for a long time. But @agentrouka-blog saw my tags and was like, “You might be onto something there.” And then @zimshan saw my tags too and did the double check for me. Thanks! And guess what? GUESS WHAT, JONSA FAM!? I was right about the order. First, Jon sees Ghost and Val, thinks her eyes are blue and her hair is like dark honey, and it is a lovely sight. Second, this line:

Val looked the part [of a princess] and rode as if she had been born on horseback. A warrior princess, he decided, not some willowy creature who sits up in a tower, brushing her hair and waiting for some knight to rescue her.

But guess what else? The order isn’t even the most striking thing. The most striking thing is how closely these two lines appear to one another — within just a few pages!!! That's what zimshan said. So I went back to read it myself. Not just the two lines to check the order, but a little before, and a little after, and everything in between. If you want, you can do the same. It’s ADWD Jon XI.

Want to know what stuck out to me most? The willowy creature line actually seems… so odd, and out of place, and unnecessary. I swear to you. Let me try to explain.

Basically, by that point in the chapter, Jon has already clearly established his take on Val. She’s beautiful, everyone knows it, but she’s more than that. She’s strong and capable. She found Tormund and brought him back to Castle Black when Jon’s Night’s Watch Rangers couldn’t manage it. Like, Jon’s thankful for Val, okay? 

Oh, and he also seems aware that he holds her in higher regard than the rest of the men who keep calling her a princess even though she’s not one. I think he feels smug about it, to be honest. Like, he wouldn’t use these words because it’s ASOIAF, but he knows he’s a budding feminist and he’s proud of himself for it. Like, “I’m so much better than these asshats who don’t respect women and think all Val has to offer is her pretty face.”

How great is that? I love book Jon so much.

Where was I, though? Oh! Oh, oh, oh! This next part is key. Up until the willowy creature line, Jon has not had a single disparaging thought about Val. Val being cruel about Shireen’s greyscale hasn’t happened yet. But for some reason — *Getting too executed. Brain malfunctioning!*

AH! I SWEAR JONSA FAM! If you read the willowy creature in fuller context, it comes across as if Jon’s correcting himself for having a disparaging thought about Val, like he’s reminding himself of who she truly is. She’s a warrior princess, not a willowy creature. But like, why? Why does Jon feel the need to do this? He hasn’t had a disparaging thought about Val, so why correct himself as if he has?

Just because she’s beautiful? Just because he’s tired of other men calling her a princess? I mean, I guess that could be the whole story. That’s certainly how we’re supposed to take it, if we’re taking it at face value. But I’m not convinced. Go read it again, and I think you’ll see that when the willowy creature line happens, it actually feels like a weird logic leap.

The dots aren’t connecting because one dot is missing!!!! Let me put a pin in that for a moment while I turn to other mini metas in our Jonsa fandom. Antis like to say, “Jon doesn’t like girls like Sansa. He doesn't like willowy creatures, he said so himself.” But we know that’s crap, right? The boy who liked Ygritte’s gentle side? The boy who helps Alys Karstark by marrying her to Sigorn? The boy who dreamed his mother was a highborn lady with kind eyes? The boy who wanted to show his hypothetical wife Winterfell’s glass gardens and bath with her in the hot pools?

Yeah, that boy is a budding feminist, like I said.

So again I ask (AGAIN!) why would Jon — who is not especially critical of women in general and has not been critical of Val at all up to this point — feel the need to correct himself by thinking this critical thing about willowy creatures? In other words, why does he lift up Val by putting down some vague idea of other women he’s never had a problem with before?

Well, obviously it turns out that I believe my facetious, tongue in cheek tags more than I realized when I wrote them. My position is that somewhere in the two pages between ...a long while since Jon had seen a sight so lovely… and ...not some willowy creature who sits up in a tower, brushing her hair… Jon realized Val reminded him of Sansa, he felt guilty and ashamed about it, and then felt the need to do damage control. And because guilt and shame are icky, confusing feelings, his damage control took the form of being critical of Sansa even though he isn’t normally critical of such women. 

Am I making sense? How do I explain myself further? Like, why am I so stuck on this idea Jon’s willowy creature line being two pages after the Ghost and Val looking lovely together line must mean Jon had a pre-canon crush?

I think the crux is what I said about the willowy creature line feeling like a weird logic leap — like the dots aren’t connecting because one is missing. The missing dot is Jon being aware that he’s mentally swapped Val with Sansa. He just doesn’t acknowledge this on the page.

Let me be extra clear. I’m now differing from several others who have written about pre-canon crush theories in that I think Jon was aware of his crush. I’ve seen many say it’s all subconscious. But this stuff with Val makes me think otherwise.

I mean, I know Jon has a pattern of dissociation. For him, thinking, and speaking, and acting from his subconsciousness is a common occurrence. So, yes, he could have subconsciously thought Val looked like Sansa and subconsciously felt guilty and ashamed and therefore subconsciously decided to do damage control by subconsciously reminding himself Val is a warrior princess and therefore not a willowy creature.

But I think GRRM was hinting at an exception to Jon’s pattern with these canon lines. Because if the first part is happening subconsciously — Jon thinking Val looks like Sansa and that it’s a lovely sight — then he wouldn’t feel the need to do damage control afterwards? If he wasn’t aware of thinking of Sansa in that moment, isn’t it more likely he’d just carry on with taking Val to meet Selyse, and the odd, out of place, unnecessary line about a willowy creature wouldn’t have been included? What else, what else?

I said earlier that I think Jon’s crush is an innocent, not sexual thing. Let me expand on that. And uuuuuhhhhh... let me clarify that I think that might be changing some over time.  My guess is when Jon was younger, his thoughts were more along these lines: “Sansa is pretty, and a proper lady, and everything men are taught to want. She’ll be a good wife for someone someday. Obviously not me. That’s sinful, I don’t want it, and I’m a bastard so I can’t marry a highborn lady anyway. But objectively, Sansa’s a good catch.” Which kinda matches how Jon thinks of Val at times, right? Like, she’s a catch but he doesn’t want her. He’s not taking Winterfell and a Wife because Winterfell belongs to Sansa and he’s a man of the Night’s Watch, dammit! But hang on a second. Sometimes Jon’s thoughts about Val are more elicit, aren’t they? He thinks about the size of her breasts and she’s the hypothetical wife he pictures romancing in Winterfell. Don’t worry, I’m not saying I’m secretly a Jon/Val shipper. What I’m getting at is this other thing we’ve talked about in the Jonsa fandom. Jone projects his general desires onto Val. He’s getting older. He’s unhappy at the Wall. Winterfell isn’t Robb’s like he thought it would be, and Bran and Rickon are thought to be dead. And Stannis is offering Winterfell and Val to him. Plus he’s now been intimate with a woman, Ygritte. So he knows that sex feels nice. All in all, Jon’s becoming more in tune with wanting Winterfell, and a wife, and a family, and wanting to fu—

You get the idea. ;)

Soooooo. If you buy into the premise that A) Jon considered Sansa a good catch when they were younger B) He’s thinking more and more about romance and sex C) Val is also a good catch and easy to project feelings onto and D) Woopsies, Val just reminded me of Sansa! Well, then where does all that leave Jon? Feeling like he needs to distance himself from positive thoughts about Sansa, right? But without ever thinking her name because of his pattern of dissociation and because GRRM is tricky like that.  Am I making my point clearer, or just talking in circles?  Like, I know plenty of people have already said Val is a switch-back-and-forth-stand-in-for-other-characters. The first two short paragraphs of this post mentions those metas.  But holy smokes! If Jon is aware of A-D mentioned above, that adds a fascinating layer of subtext to his scenes with and thoughts about Val.  Let’s talk about it forever!

Just kidding. I think I’m almost done here.  Basically, I think the willowy creature line is Jon knowingly saying to himself, “Yikes, the thoughts I had about Sansa in the past didn’t bother me much because they were 99% innocent. But they are less innocent now and that’s a problem! You can’t like Sansa! Don’t confuse Sansa with Val,  dummy! Val is a warrior princess! Sansa is a willowy creature and willowy creatures are bad!”

Okay, sure, Jon.  Let me wrap up with one more canon line.

Of Sansa brushing out Lady’s coat and singing to herself. You know nothing, Jon Snow.

We often link this line to Ygritte for obvious reasons, but I’m now in the habit of linking it more to Val and the canon lines mentioned previously. I think GRRM wrote a the three lines — a sight so lovely + willow creature + of Sansa brushing out Lady’s coat — as a subtle continuation of one another. Us Jonsas saw the potential for underlying romantic feelings in the last one, that’s nothing new. But I want to add that it’s a direct contrast to the willowy creature line. As Jon is bleeding out, he can no longer be bothered to put up a front and pretend he doesn’t have feelings for Sansa, feelings that have gotten more complicated as of late.

Oh so subtle. Really not that much different than what others have said before me. But different enough I wanted to mention it. Now someone put it in a fanfic!!

[astradrifting]

GRRM really created so many parallels and foreshadow using the DoD characters that honestly we could just figure the asoiaf ending by analyzing it. My favorite is the Aegon III-D@ny parallels, the fact that one of his closest allies was a face-scarred Master of coin Lannister who ended as Hand to Bran' parallel character just make it so obvious its funny.

Oh my god I didn’t even realise Tyland Lannister was initially on the greens’ side! I’m not super fond of Tyrion ending up as Hand, but you’re right that it’s so obviously meant to reference him. There’s so many parallels that it’s a little crazy. I don’t want to say that the second Dance will end exactly as the first did, it’d be a little too neat if history repeated entirely, but you can see so many echoes of it even in the show’s bastardised ending.

“The broken, shattered realm suffered for a while yet, but the Dance of the Dragons was done. Now what awaited the realm was the False Dawn, the Hour of the Wolf, the rule of the regents, and the Broken King.”

(TWOIAF, Aegon II)

I’m not sure what the False Dawn is going to parallel to, it refers to the period of time after Aegon II’s death but before Lord Stark got to King’s Landing, when people thought that peace had finally come. It kind of brings to mind the War for the Dawn, though personally I think that the threat of the Others will be resolved before the Dance is over. The Hour of the Wolf is obviously about House Stark’s rise back to power, and the Broken King is Bran - though if he actually becomes known as Bran the Broken I might end up committing violence ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. 

The parts about Lord Corlys Velaryon are why I’m so hopeful that Jon’s book ending will be completely different from the show’s. He’s arrested for Aegon II’s death by Cregan Stark, even though Cregan had previously declared for Rhaenyra, because as TWOIAF puts it, “to kill a cruel and unjust king in lawful battle was one thing. But foul murder, and the use of poison, was a betrayal against the very gods who had anointed him.”

Corlys didn’t deny his guilt, and expressed no regret. “What I did, I did for the good of the realm. I would do the same again. The madness had to end.”

Cregan Stark declared him to be guilty of murder, regicide, and high treason, and he was sentenced to execution. But many spoke in his defence, even people who had fought against him in the Dance. Baela and Rhaena Targaryen, Corlys’ granddaughters and Aegon III’s half-sisters, convinced Aegon to issue an edict pardoning Lord Velaryon, which Alysanne Blackwood then convinced Cregan to let stand. Lord Velaryon was pardoned and even restored to his offices and honours, made one of the king’s regents and given a place on the small council.

Corlys’ words definitely could be Jon’s as well, a much more in-character declaration post-D@ny’s death than the drivel GoT tried to feed us. I was worried for a bit that this would be how Tyrion is let off scot-free, but Baela and Rhaena, who were vital to his release, are such obvious Arya and Sansa stand-ins, and they’re certainly not going to expend any effort in helping Tyrion. So Corlys’ circumstances more likely lays the groundwork for how Jon will be freed and remain in political power, while Tyland frankly inexplicably becoming Aegon III’s Hand after he was in favour of brutally killing him parallels Tyrion managing to fail up, as a way of reconciling the old regime with the new one.

This makes Tyrion becoming Hand more palatable IMO. Either Jon and Tyrion both should have been punished or neither should have been punished, not the travesty where Tyrion gets everything he’s ever wanted while Jon is exiled to a Watch with no purpose and a Wall that’s already half-collapsed, so what exactly can it protect against? I suppose they were afraid of seemingly rewarding Jon for killing d@ny, especially if pol!Jon had been revealed, but most people noticed how nonsensical his ending was, and it just led to ‘Bloodraven/Bran is the real villain’ takes anyway.

(Side note: Asha/Yara basically still being loyal to D at the end annoys me so much, and made no sense. Jon did more to help save her by giving Theon that pep talk than D@ny did. Maybe it was a leftover from her taking Victarion’s role in the story, but in no reasonable world is anyone going to listen to the Ironborn who brought the Fire threat over in the first place.)

Of course Tyland Lannister isn’t actually Hand for long, given that he dies barely two years later from Winter Fever, feared and hated, alone except for a maester and King Aegon. It might be an indication that Tyrion will face a similar fate, that he’ll die after he’s seemingly won, exactly what he threatened Cersei with:

“A day will come when you think yourself safe and happy, and suddenly your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth, and you'll know the debt is paid."

(ACOK, Tyrion XII)

So that I can stop talking about Tyrion, here’s some facts about Rhaena and Baela that are obviously meant to reference Sansa and Arya, so much so that it feels a little bit like GRRM is winking and going “See what I did there? Huh? Huh? Did you see??”:

- their descriptions: “Rhaena was slender and graceful; Baela was lean and quick; Rhaena loved to dance; Baela lived to ride...” + “Baela was wild and willful”, “more boyish than ladylike”, and kept her hair cropped short as a boy’s

- Rhaena spent most of the Dance in the Vale, where she lived in relative comfort as the ward of Lady Jeyne Arryn. Baela was a dragonrider and so moved between Dragonstone and Driftmark, but was captured on Dragonstone when Aegon II descended upon it

- Rhaena was favoured to be queen after her brother, considered more qualified than her wild sister

- Baela liked to spend time with “unsuitable companions” she would bring to the Red Keep - including a comely juggler, a blacksmith’s apprentice whose muscles she admired (!!!), a legless beggar, a pair of twin girls from a brothel, an entire troupe of mummers once

- After her brother’s regents tried to marry her to a lord 40 years older than her, Baela escaped the Red Keep by climbing out of a window, trading clothes with a washerwoman, then walking right out of the front gate. She ran away to Driftmark and married her supposed cousin (though more likely he was her half-uncle), the legitimised bastard Alyn Velaryon, which might have had me worried about j0nrya if Alyn weren’t best known for being a daring sailor who went on many voyages, including sailing the Sunset Sea, until he was finally lost at sea during Aegon IV’s reign. Alyn’s mother was also called Mouse, for being “small, quick, and always underfoot.”

- another fun fact about Alyn: he’s a bad haggler, and had to agree to a high ransom and many concessions in order to get Prince Viserys returned to Westeros. This automatically disqualifies him as a Jon stand-in, because as we all know, Jon Snow can haggle like the best of fishwives.

- My absolutely favourite detail that has my jonsa heart singing - Rhaena was more dutiful than her sister and would have married a man that the king and council chose, saying that as long as he was “kind and gentle and noble, I know that I shall love him.” She was able to marry her first choice, whom the regents didn’t immediately approve of but that they ultimately accepted  - Ser Corwyn Corbray, the brother of the Lord Protector of the Realm, a second son (!) whose late father had gifted him the Valyrian steel sword Lady Forlorn (!!!)

And as a treat for @istumpysk, some similarities between Rickon and Viserys II!

- the youngest child of their family

- separated from their older brother after they were forced to flee their home, trying to get to safety while their other brothers and mother were at war

- worshipped their oldest (half-)brothers, but were closer to the brother nearest their age

- spends the war stuck on an island, populated by people closely linked to their family’s origins - Skagosi are descended mostly from the First Men, while Viserys was on Lys, where the blood of Old Valyria still runs strong

- sought by/held hostage by a powerful and wealthy family, who will treat them well but whose intentions are dubious

- will be brought back from exile by an upjumped bastard/commoner from a port town who was raised to lordship and became their monarch’s chief admiral

- after they are returned, long after the wars and crises, is happily welcomed as the heir to their older brother’s throne (shhhhh just let me have this, let the baby live)

Thanks for the ask!

[cappymightwrite]

ASOIAF & Norse Mythology

PART 1: Introduction

Laying Out the Groundwork...

I’ve been interested in all things Norse/Vikings for a long time now, so when I first read George RR Martin’s ASOIAF series I was struck by, as I think many people have been, the quite obvious parallels to Norse mythology and Viking Age culture. I’ve read a few other Norse themed metas here and there, but I thought I might have a go at adding my own two cents since I am currently doing a masters in Viking and Medieval Norse studies at two Nordic universities...despite the hellfire that is 2020.

(Am I procrastinating my uni work by doing this meta? Yes. Do I regret it? …ask me later.)

I haven’t read every single Norse/ASOIAF meta out there, but from the ones I have read, I think there has been a bit of a tendency to argue for very direct parallels between the two. For instance, claiming one ASOIAF character as an explicit parallel for a particular Norse mythological figure, or using certain mythic events, and how they are described within their medieval sources, as an exact blueprint for how things are going to play out in the books.

(Let’s all just pretend the show and its ending didn’t happen. Ok, good? Good.)

I completely understand the urge to take this approach, it is a very tempting, fun thing to do. However, I think it maybe conveniently sets aside some unfortunate home truths that rather harm this kind of reading:

[November 27, 1998, on the topic of the Wars of the Roses]

The Wars of the Roses have always fascinated me, and certainly did influence A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE, but there's really no one-for-one character-for-character correspondence. I like to use history to flavour my fantasy, to add texture and verisimilitude, but simply rewriting history with the names changed has no appeal for me. I prefer to reimagine it all, and take it in new and unexpected directions.

[February 29, 2000, on the topic of historical influences for Dorne]

I read a lot of history, and mine it for good stuff, but I also like to mix and match. That is to say, I don’t do straight one-for-one transplants, as some authors do, so you can’t really say that X in Westeros equals Y in real life. More often X in Westeros equals Y and Z in real life, with squidges of Q, L, and A.

[June 20, 2001 on the topic of whether GRRM borrows from history for the character of Loras Tyrell]

Well, yes and no. I have drawn on a great many influences for these books. I do use incidents from history, yes, although I try not to do a straight one-for-one transposition of fact into fiction. I prefer to mix and match, and to add in some imaginative elements as well.

These are just a few examples I’ve pulled out, and granted he’s talking about historical sources in all three instances here, but nevertheless I think the same thing applies to mythological sources as well: GRRM does not do ‘straight one-for-one transplants.’ Bearing this in mind, I would be very hesitant to say that Robert Baratheon equals Þórr (Thor), for example. That kind of shoehorning is not what I’m interested in with this particular meta. Instead, I want to look at how the ways in which the Norsemen’s mythological worldview might have influenced GRRM’s writing, and more specifically what we’ll eventually be facing in The Winds of Winter.

An Argument for Norse Influence…

A lot of the time when people discuss Norse parallels in ASOIAF the assumption that GRRM has read and is explicitly drawing on Norse mythology is taken as a given. The parallels seem so obvious that we don’t take a moment to consider the validity of that assumption before ploughing straight ahead with various comparisons and theories. So, before I really begin, I think it’s important to actually give some evidence as to why I agree that GRRM has read certain Norse mythological texts and is therefore consciously using them in his writing.

For starters, just trawling through some of the fan questions he’s answered in the past (NB: I was planning to go through all of them, but…there’s just so many), GRRM does make a few references to Norse myths/Vikings, e.g.:

[June 11, 1999, on the topic of Ravens as messenger birds]

[…] I also liked the mythic resonances. Odin used ravens as his messengers, and they were also thought be able to fly between the worlds of the living and the dead.

[April 23, 2001, on the topic of Wildlings in the north]

Raiding is definitely a part of wildling culture, as it was for many in the real world -- the Norse who went a-viking every summer, the ancient Celtic cattle raiders, the Scots border reivers, etc.

So, from just these two examples it is clear to us that GRRM has some degree of knowledge regarding Norse mythology and Viking Age culture. You could argue that this is just a basic kind of knowledge, which isn’t illustrative of any deeper understanding or interest. However, I think the first quote proves otherwise.

Apart from Þórr, Óðinn (Odin) is probably the most well known out the Norse gods to a non-medievalist audience; though thanks to Marvel comics/films, Loki is quite (in)famous as well. Quite a lot of people might know that Óðinn is associated with ravens, two in particular: Huginn and Muninn, whose names translate from Old Norse-Icelandic to ‘Thought’ and ‘Mind’ or ‘Memory,’ respectively. But their function, or role in connection to Óðinn, might require a bit of a deeper read and understanding.

Indeed, in the quote above GRRM notes that they are Óðinn´s ‘messengers,’ which is a detail that occurs in several Old Norse sources, namely in chapter 38 of the Gylfaginning section of Snorri Sturluson’s Prose Edda (c. 1220), as well as in the Eddic poem Grímnismál, a work that is included in the Codex Regius (compiled 13th cent., containing 31 poems), the principal manuscript of the Poetic Edda:

‘Two ravens sit on Óðinn’s shoulders, and into his ears they tell all the news they see or hear. Their names are Huginn [Thought] and Muninn [Mind, Memory]. At sunrise he sends them off to fly throughout the whole world, and they return in time for the first meal. Thus he gathers knowledge about many things that are happening, and so people call him the raven god. As is said:

Huginn and Muninn

fly each day

over the wide world.

I fear for Huginn

that he may not return,

though I worry more for Muninn.’

                                                         (The Lay of Grimnir, 20)

In fact, as seen above, Snorri uses Grímnismál as a source to back up his own claims within the Gylfaginning.*

NB: In Old Norse, Gylfaginning translates to ‘the beguiling’ or ‘deluding of Gylfi.’ It is the first part of Snorri’s Prose Edda, and is structured as a question-and-answer conversation between Gylfi — a king of ‘the land that men now call Sweden,’ though there’s no historical record of him — under the guise of the name Gangleri, and three enthroned men: High, Just-As-High and Third. In chapter 20 of Gylfaginning it is revealed that these are in fact pseudonyms for Óðinn. 

Elsewhere, we see reference to Huginn and Muninn as messengers in Snorri’s other work, Heimskringla (c. 1230), a collection of several sagas about Swedish and Norwegian kings. In chapter 7 of Ynglinga saga, Snorri writes that:

[Óðinn] had two ravens which he had trained to speak. They flew over distant countries and told him much news. From these things he became extremely wise.

So, we can see that this detail about Huginn and Muninn as messenger birds is well established in several Old Norse sources, and is therefore likely to be included in any general guide or overview to Norse mythology. GRRM could have left it at that and all would be fine and dandy. But he doesn’t. He adds that ‘they were also thought be able to fly between the worlds of the living and the dead.’ For me, this is an interesting inclusion, because as you can see from the quotes above, though they are said to travel ‘over the wide world’ and ‘over distant countries,’ it isn’t explicitly stated in the Prose Edda, Poetic Edda or Heimskringla that they fly between the realms of the living and the dead. 

The closest thing I can find that fits in with what GRRM is saying here is a fragmentary verse from the Third Grammatical Treatise, a text composed around the middle of the 13th century by Óláfr Þórðarson, a nephew of Snorri Sturluson (and he seems to have been influenced by his uncle’s works). The second part of this text contains examples of Old Norse-Icelandic skaldic poetry — this is where we find our reference to Huginn and Muninn:

Two ravens flew from Hnikar’s [Óðinn’s]

shoulders; Huginn to the hanged and

Muninn to the slain [lit. corpses].

                                                                       [TGT]

According to this verse, from Óðinn’s shoulders, the two ravens fly to the ‘hanged’ and the ‘slain,’ so their association with death is pretty clear. The problem, however, with saying that they ‘fly between the worlds of the living and the dead,’ is which worlds? Does he mean from Miðgarðr (Midgard) to Valhöll* ´the hall of the slain’? Or to Fólkvangr ‘field of the host’? Or from Ásgarðr (Asgard) to Hel? I know what he means, I’m just being pedantic.

NB: Valhalla is a modernised version of the Old Norse-Icelandic Valhöll — in modern Icelandic, the ‘LL’ in Valhöll is pronounced sort of like ‘TL.’ So, for instance, the new Assassin’s Creed game…the Norsemen/Vikings, as well as later medieval sources, wouldn’t have referred to it as Valhalla, they would have called it Valhöll. 

But back to the Third Grammatical Treatise — it should be noted that, according to Tarrin Wills, ‘of the poetic examples, a large amount of material is not found elsewhere and a large proportion of that is anonymous.’ Furthermore, the above fragment in particular ‘belongs to no known poem’ (Wills), which is probably why we don’t find this kind of detail about Huginn and Muninn elsewhere in other, better known mythic sources, such as the Prose Edda.

What I’m trying to get at here is that, in my mind, for GRRM to make the claim that Óðinn’s ravens were ‘thought be able to fly between the worlds of the living and the dead’ he’d have to have more than just a basic interest in Norse mythology, because not all guides/overviews/introductions to the Norse myths include or reference this obscure, fragmentary verse. I mean, I don’t particularly remember it coming up in my Old Nordic Religion and Belief module I did last year, so that’s why it stands out to me.

Ok, so GRRM has definitely read up on Norse mythology. Great, point proved! Ah…but then there’s this:

[January 20, 1999]

[Summary from Kay-Arne Hansen: I asked him if he had read 'Norwegian Kingssagas' by Snorre Sturlasson, and explained that I thought so on the basis of Sansa's story about Ser Arryk and Ser Erryk seeming to be the equivalent of the brother kings Alrik and Eirik, and went on to make suggestions about other possible 'inspirators' from the 'Kingssagas'.]

Ah... well... a fascinating theory, but...

I did take a semester of Scandinavian history back my sophomore year in college, which was.... hmmmm... around about 1967-8. I read a couple of Icelandic sagas during the course, and found them thoroughly compelling, but after the passage of thirty years I confess I no longer recall the titles or the names of any of the characters. It may be that chunks of them, buried in my subconscious, somehow surfaced during A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE... but it seems a long shot.

Ser Arryk and Ser Erryk were inspired by the twin knights of Arthurian myth, Sir Balon and Sir Balin, who appear in Mallory.

Sorry.

Nice try, though.

I came across this Q/A on reddit and the response was quite a few redditors feeling a tad despondent. They seemed to understand GRRM’s answer to mean that any reference/allusion to Norse mythology in his texts were just memories of a long ago Scandinavian history course ‘buried in [his] subconscious’ that ‘somehow surfaced’ during the writing process, so weren’t intentional, conscious inclusions. Even then, GRRM considers this hypothesis ‘a long shot.’

However, I wouldn’t necessary give up all hope, because the texts being referred to here are Snorri Sturluson’s Heimskringla, which we looked at above, and most likely the Íslendingasögur (aka the Sagas of Icelanders), referred to by GRRM as ‘a couple of Icelandic sagas’ he read in college. 

Heimskringla does include mythological content, but as I’ve already mentioned, it’s primarily a history of Norwegian and Swedish kings — though it should be noted that GRRM doesn’t outright say he hasn’t read Heimskringla. As for the text(s) he does mention, in Egils saga for instance, there is reference to pre-Christian religion, but again, I wouldn’t look to the Íslendingasögur as a go-to source for Norse myths.

Granted, the question being asked is about historical sources and inspirations, I still think it’s telling that GRRM doesn’t mention having read the Prose Edda or Poetic Edda here. Because those are the two key textual sources that we look to for the Norse myths, and even though they were written/compiled well after the conversion to Christianity, they still arguably preserve aspects and memories of what went before. So, I really doubt he wouldn’t have come across them on that Scandinavian History course — the gradual conversion to Christianity in Scandinavia and Iceland is a pretty important period in their cultural history. Going further, I think that these are texts he’s returned to time and time again...in particular the sections that refer to the ‘Twilight of the Gods,’ aka Ragnarök.

References/Bibliography:

Snorri Sturluson, Heimskringla I: The Beginnings to Óláfr Tryggvason, trans. by Alison Finlay & Anthony Faulkes, (London: Viking Society for Northern Research, 2011)

Snorri Sturluson, The Prose Edda, trans. and intr. by Jesse Byock, (London: Penguin Classics, 2005)

Tarrin Wills, “The Anonymous Verse in the Third Grammatical Treatise,” in The Fantastic in Old Norse/Icelandic Literature, Sagas, and the British Isles: Preprint Papers of The 13th International Saga Conference Durham and York, 6–12 August 2006, ed. by John McKinnell, David Ashurst & Donata Kick, (Durham: The Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2006)

END OF PART 1...

With that out of the way, parts 2 and 3 will be on:

The ‘Long Night’ and the Fimbulvetr

Ragnarök and the ‘Red Comet’

I’ve also go some other potential parts in the works, but let me know what you thought of this, if I should continue, or if I should just shut up, lol. I promise the next sections will be dealing with the really interesting stuff, I just wanted to strengthen my forthcoming arguments with this intro first :D

Cappy x

[ayrennaranaaldmeri]

Hey, your rant about the food issueTM is very valid. Was just curious to hear your thoughts on this: considering D spent the majority of S.2 looking for shelter and food for her people, doesn't it seem like lazy writing that neither her, nor J or the very smart people who advise her thought of this? I get the writers are trying to pit S and D against each other (maybe to showcase that S would be a better ruler?) but it just seems like lazy writing. Do you think there's another explanation?

Hey! Thanks for the question; I got a bit long and rambling so i’m going to put my response under a read more. 

Yeah, it really is interesting that S2 D had gonethrough this and yet she doesn’t even seem to care about food problems in s8. Ithink d&d’s writing has never been that great to begin with – and there’s definitelya marked decline in quality after they passed the events of the published books.imo they’re ignoring “pre dothraki sea D” and going for dark!d now bc they’re onthe last season and they have to get to it, but unlike grrm, they really didn’tlay the groundwork that he does for her character to come to the ‘dragons plantno trees’ and ‘fire and blood’ decision. (meereenese blot goes into this farbetter than I could & is grrm approved).

Since they’ve already been relying on this kh*leesibadass kween persona more than the meat of what makes her book counterpart agreat character for a while now and most of what she wants in the show she getsor she takes in the manner of a conqueror, and all her weaknesses come through when it comes to the actual ruling part of it, so I’m assuming it’s the same logicfor food for her army; the first option didn’t work so she either just didn’tthink about it deeply or she just assumes that since Jon bent the knee, thenortherners are going to take care of her giant army bc after all, she’s theirqueen now. (honestly I think j & d were too busy fucking l.ol)

She’s always been kinda short sighted imo, like I haveto side-eye a person who’d leave her recently jilted mercenary lover in chargeof a city that still has tons of problems; I can’t just believe that meereen istotes fine now bc she roasted some boats and killed the sons of the harpy, butthen no one really seems to give a fuck about Essos soooo.

With the advisors, she doesn’t really listen to them, like you’d think she would with that heartto heart with varys but she’s kind erratic, and loses her temper when tyrion’sinitial advice failed. Despite Varys and Tyrion being totally on her team,they’re still relatively new to the team. It’s not totally surprising that ifd&d are taking her on a darker route, they’d kill off Barristan, someoneshe trusted and would listen to. before she even set foot on Westeros.I’m assuming the reach food was their first and only option, dany was relying on it feed her giant army but her temper got the better of her and she turned it all to dust. I would say they probably thought they had a lot more time than they did and they’d be able to scrounge it all up from somewhere since they have no idea that they basically handed the NK a wmd that he used to breach the wall, drastically reducing the time they had to prepare.I also do think they’re all just primarily focused on the war and the war alone bc Jon’s primary goal is to stop the NK but if that was their logic, it’s bad, because wars can take time, even against ice zombies and your soldiers need to eat. Anyway again, Jon is probably first and foremost concerned with getting her army and dragons to winterfell bc he just wants to end the NK threat. Unless he’s playing some long game, which, Idek because he definitely acts like a stupidhead who is borderline obsessed with her already when’s talking about her with other people “iTs tReAsOn” but when he’s with her emilia’s pouring dany’s heart out and kit is stuck in permanent hide the pain Harold mode. I’ve seen how he looks when he’s in love and I’m sorry but that’s just not it.On the other hand, the fact that they didn’t seem to think about the food or anything might just be bad writing as well tbh.  They’re definitely trying to show that Sansa is more of a ruler and long term planner than D (bc I think this season is definitely going to be contrasting Cersei, Sansa and D a lot), but I don’t think its lazy writing bc while D-stans tend to insist that it’s not important, Northern Independence is a major theme of these books, a lot of these people believe in that cause and their king only to have their trust in him seemingly betrayed and, The Starklings, the Northerners, they have every right to be suspicious of new people that marches in with a gigantic army. Hell, D gets off on scaring a bunch of wary peasants as soon as she enters Winterfell just because they weren’t instantly like “MHYSA MHYSA MHYSA  MY KWEEN”; they weren’t even looking at her with disgust, spitting at her, protesting her arrival. They were just staring at her and her giant army. (yeah she’s happy to see her children or whatever, but smug as hell that they invoke fear in ordinary people) which speaks volumes to her attitude. She demands respect, she doesn’t want to earn it. And this episode has tons of call backs to the first episode of the show, and the last time some ruler marched in with their host, all subsequent events led to a lot of tragedy for the North and for the Starks.The food issue is being hammered in and it’s being hammered in intentionally. “The dragons only ate 13?? Sheep and some other cattle or something, and that amount means ‘tHe dRaGoNs ArEn’T eAtInG’” but they wouldn’t put in the effort to mention a number unless they’re drawing your attention to how much of a toll feeding those iguanas (’what do dragons eat anyway? whatever they want’) is gonna take on the limited food supply. (they’re gonna end up hunting something and by something I absolutely mean people, drogon already has a taste for human flesh). 

Most likely, D’s own carelessness is boiling down to the darker route they’re planning on taking her down. If they weren’t deliberately making her look bad or setting some more conflict (not just between her and Sansa), Bran wouldn’t have chosen the time when Sam’s opinion of D was at its lowest to have him tell Jon the truth about his parentage.Of course, I wouldn’t put it past them to completely ignore everything they’ve established and just make her the uwu hero again and throw the starklings at her feet for forgiveness or even turn the starklings into villains™ but I don’t think they would do that bc in the end, D and her iguanas are not the most powerful weapon against the Night King. Bran is. 

[what-do-1000-swords-look-like]

The hell of it is that George RR Martin specifically said that he turned down many deals to bring asoiaf to the screen b/c they tried to make the whole movie or show about just Dany or Jon or other characters. He was afraid that this kind of thing would happen. I feel really bad for him! I cannot believe he is letting HBO touch any of his other work. Maybe by the time GOT S7&8 happened it was too late and the contract was already signed. Do you plan to watch Blood & Fire?

Hey there, Anon! 

I absolutely had no idea about that, I’m so glad you told me. I knew he hadn’t wanted any screen adaptations but I never knew it was because they kept trying to make that the focus. That explains so much and it makes perfect sense! I really despised the whole line Melisandre said in season 7: “And now I have brought fire and ice together” and I rolled my eyes and said out loud “no, it’s not just about them, there are other characters in the story, Mel, come on now.” For me, there were multiple symbols of fire and ice in the story, not just their characters or houses, for crying out loud. To me, it was mostly about the two threats converging on Westeros so I really didn’t like it when they played that angle. So it’s interesting that GRRM himself didn’t want them to be most of the story, either. I wonder what his exact thoughts were when seeing the last season and how Dany’s POV eclipsed the whole story for all of the characters. Hmm. 

And then of course we get this:

They promo’ed the crap out of it. And then that finale happened. Ugh, poor GRRM. I’m not familiar with him too much and I’ve only read the first two books but just from watching him talk about foreshadowing and his writing process while researching for that post from last night, he really is brilliant and I appreciate him and his work so much. I mean the dedication and time it must have taken to lay all of that groundwork for that series... 

He is a master storyteller and no one can tell me different. 

That’s a good point. You could be right about the contract already being signed. I also think it wasn’t so much HBO he didn’t care for (if his interviews are anything to go by) but the whole experience with D&D and their adaptation and the whole process as a whole. He talked about how GoT was bad for him as far as writing inspiration and pacing goes so he was relieved the series was over I think. HBO was definitely willing to do more seasons, give more $ to D&D, but they turned it all down and then they shortened the last two seasons on top of it (jerks). It’s a shame really. Just think what we could have gotten if D&D had loosened the reins a bit, given it more time, and maybe brought in some new writers to complement the ones they had or even new showrunners, some new blood and fresh eyes. 

Oooo, that is a great question. I’m afraid I don’t know much about it. I know they had announced it recently I think? And I quickly saw it one day when on YouTube but I didn’t watch the video and it made me wonder what happened to the Naomi Watts series, is that the same one? But I quickly learned it wasn’t the same and then Naomi’s series got cancelled? I felt bad for her but who knows how that would have gone. Oh wait, I just looked it up and OMG, Sapochnik is a showrunner!

Sorry, I love Miguel Sapochnik! Okay that answers that question LOL.

I will definitely check it out if he’s behind the wheel. I love that man. Hearing him talk about the episodes he shot, the actors’ performances, after the finale aired -- he was just brilliant. I may or may not have a huge crush on the man.

But at the same time, I’m going into this cautiously lol. But I am curious to see how the bring that Targaryen history to life. I haven’t read the book yet but from what I saw all over, it looked fascinating to say the least so this should be interesting. ;-) Will you be checking it out, too?

Thank you for the ask, Anon! <3